Court asks U.S. to stay executions / Mexico says its 51 citizens on death row were denied rights

Kevin Sullivan, Washington Post

Published 4:00 am, Thursday, February 6, 2003

The International Court of Justice ruled Wednesday that the United States must stay the executions of three Mexicans on death row in Texas and Oklahoma while the court considers Mexico's complaint that the condemned men's rights were violated.

"It's a great day," said Sandra Babcock, a Minnesota lawyer advising the Mexican government, which filed suit last month demanding that the court order the United States to commute the death sentences of all 51 Mexicans facing the death penalty.

Mexico contends that U.S. officials violated the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, which guarantees people access to their country's diplomatic missions when accused of a crime in a foreign country. It contends that none of the Mexican death row inmates were informed of that right.

In a unanimous decision by its 15 members, the U.N. court in the Hague ordered temporary stays for the three men whose executions are most imminent: Texas death row inmates Cesar Fierro Reyna and Roberto Moreno Ramos and Oklahoma inmate Osvaldo Torres Aguilera.

President Trump addresses nation after mass shooting at Florida SchoolWhite House

It is the third World Court case in five years against the United States dealing with the death penalty. In a nearly identical high-profile case in 2001, it found that the United States had violated international law by not informing a German citizen of his right to consular assistance.

Walter LaGrand was executed in Arizona despite an order to postpone his punishment until it had heard Germany's case.

Related Stories

Reading the ruling Wednesday, presiding Judge Gilbert Guillaume said the court supported Mexico's argument that executing the men would cause "irreparable" damage to their rights if the court later finds in Mexico's favor.

Mexico's Ambassador to the Netherlands Santiago Onate said the decision was "a confirmation of international law."

"This is a clear indication that the World Court will not allow the execution of any Mexican nationals while the case is pending," Babcock added. "And I fully expect the United States to comply."

State Department spokesman Charles Barclay said Wednesday the United States was "still studying" the ruling. He noted that the court had not yet ruled on the substance of Mexico's case.

Court spokeswoman Laurence Blairon said the court could in theory complain to the U.N. security council -- which can impose sanctions -- if the ruling is not obeyed.

Babcock said that if the United States were to ignore the ruling, it would "create a dangerous precedent."

"It does not cost the U.S. anything to comply with the order, but it could cost a great deal if the United States sends a message that it doesn't care one whit about the opinion of the most distinguished group of jurists in the world," Babcock said.

Babcock said ignoring the ruling could be dangerous for Americans accused of crimes in other countries. She said if the United States doesn't honor the treaty, other countries may also ignore it.

Of the three convicted men, Fierro's case is the best-known. He was 22 years old when he was convicted of the Feb. 27, 1979, shooting death of an El Paso taxi driver, Nicolas Castanon. Despite a ruling in a Texas appeals court that his confession was probably coerced, he was not granted a retrial. Fierro has been on death row in Texas longer than any other inmate.

Ramos, 48, was sentenced to death in February 1992 for killing his wife, Leticia, and his two youngest children, Abigail, 8, and Jonathan, 3, with a hammer.

Mexico, which opposes the death penalty, filed its suit against the United States last month. While it asked the court to stay the execution of all 51 Mexicans on death row, the court said a stay was needed for only the three most urgent cases for now.

When the suit was filed last month, the United States argued that granting Mexico's request for a stay of all executions would be an unwarranted intrusion on the U.S. criminal justice system and U.S. sovereignty.

Elihu Lauterpacht, a lawyer for the United States, labeled the Mexican case a publicity stunt, and said that an order to stay executions in state prisons might be unenforceable for the U.S. federal government.